Aleks Syntek: "De Noche En La Ciudad"
Ernie Harwell - 1918-2010
The gentle man who brought baseball -- and summer -- to millions of people over generations has died.
I cannot count the times I listened to a baseball game called by Ernie; the summer nights on the back porch, the days at the pool, riding in the car going somewhere, be it to work or driving up to northern Michigan, the signal from Detroit's WJR fading in and out the farther away we got. At night he was a gentle presence lulling me to sleep as I hoped the Tigers would pull it out in the ninth at an away game in Seattle or California.Harwell succumbed to cancer of the bile duct, and passed away at his home in Novi, Mich. Doctors diagnosed the condition as an aggressive form in August, and Harwell and his family decided against surgery at his age. He explained his situation with an extraordinary sense of peace, both to his friends in the community and to fans at Comerica Park when he made one last visit in September.
"I've got a great attitude. I just look forward to a new adventure," Harwell told the Detroit Free Press when he disclosed his illness. "God gives us so many adventures, and I've had some great ones. It's been a terrific life."
Unlike a lot of baseball broadcasters, he didn't feel as if he had to fill each moment on the air with talk; there were times when all you could hear was the background noise of the park as the batter got ready or the pitcher leaned in to get the signal. Finally: "Here's the windup.... and [thud] he struck him out." You could see the game through his voice better than any TV coverage, and to this day for millions of baseball fans, the only way to watch baseball is over the radio.
Ernie was there from spring training -- when he opened each first broadcast with the words of the Song of Solomon -- to the last pitch in October; when the Tigers won the Series in 1968, and when they were at the bottom of the standings. He taught us about baseball and winning and losing and disappointment and joy, and for a man I never met but whose voice is as immediately recognizable to me as my own father's, I will always think of good times, quiet nights, celebrations and the joy of a game that isn't won on brute strength alone.
"For lo, the winter is past, the rain is over and gone; the flowers appear on the earth; the time of the singing of birds is come, and the voice of the turtle is heard in our land."
[Note: If there are less flattering things to be said about Harwell, they have been excluded because I am unaware of them, not as the result of any deliberate intent to whitewash his life. Please feel welcome to comment on the entirety of his work and life in this thread.]
Lostie News
Okay, first things first, with the awesome news: ABC has agreed to let Cuse and Lindelof expand the series finale of Lost from two hours to two-and-a-half.
The producers of ABC's hit drama have shot so much crucial material for the show's hugely anticipated series finale that the network has agreed to extend the last episode by an extra half hour.Also note that ABC is doing up another of its enhanced editions of the series pilot to air on the 22nd. Sunday before the show is a two-hour retrospective titled Lost: The Final Journey. And following local news that evening is Jimmy Kimmel Live: Aloha to Lost.
Set your DVRs, Losties!
Speaking of DVRs and Gerald McRaney, did you know that McRaney appeared in four episodes of The Incredible Hulk, each time playing a different character?
Greatest. Actor. Ever. But you already knew that. He rocked the mic in Simon and Simon and Major Dad and Touched by an Angel (uh what?). That's why James James Abrams (the guy who invented Lost, as I am sure you know) has cast McRaney in his new spy show (which is soooo not Alias: it stars African-Americans!) for NBC.
Undercovers stars Boris Kodjoe (Soul Food) and Gugu Mbatha-Raw (Doctor Who) as married ex-CIA agents who get pulled back into the spy biz.Gerald McRaney and his atavistic moustache star as Kodjoe and Mbatha-Raw's bosses at the CIA. This show is going to be great, like a peanut butter cup. "You got your Gerald in my James James!" "You got your James James in my Gerald!"
Set your DVRs, Undercoversies!
Also on the James James tip, exclusive news (not really): James James's new movie, which hasn't even been made yet, is called Super 8. It is rumoured to be a sequel to Cloverfield and not a prequel to Super 8½. Cloverfield was a movie, I think, about a not-Godzilla destroying NYC. The trailer for Super 8 was secretly included with the Iron Man 2 release last weekend. Skulduggery!
Set your DVRs, Cloverfieldsies!
That's it for Lost news this week. Stay tuned for more, as it happens!
p.s. Dan Akroyd is concerned about (illegal) aliens.
(And, just FYI, this is not the Lost open thread. That's over here. Let's please keep this thread spoiler-free, not everyone saw the series finale of Simon and Simon. Thanks.)
In a Just World, You'd Be Charging Her Head with Murder!
[Trigger warning for violence.]
Every defendant has a right to and deserves a vigorous defense, but sometimes this shit just makes me want to scream: George Huguely is a 22-year-old lacrosse player at the University of Virginia lacrosse player charged with killing his ex-girlfriend, 22-year-old Yeardley Love, who was also a Virginia lacrosse player. He has admitted entering Love's apartment the night she died, kicking in her bedroom door, and forcing his way into the room.
He then "shook Love, and her head repeatedly hit the wall," said an affidavit filed in the case.Of course it was. Because Huguely merely "shook Love," and "her head repeatedly hit the wall." It wasn't like he was shaking her specifically to knock her head into the wall! Geez! Her head hit the wall all on its own. I mean, maybe the police ought to be interviewing her head to see why it decided to hit the wall while Huguely was shaking her. Look, all's I'm saying, Your Honor, is that if she didn't want her head hitting the wall, maybe she shouldn't have been sitting so close to it when he attacked her.
...Mr. Huguely was charged with first-degree murder. But Francis Lawrence, Mr. Huguely's lawyer, said Ms. Love's death was not intentional.
"Until more information becomes available, it is our hope that no conclusions will be drawn or judgments made about George or his case," Mr. Lawrence said, adding that his client was withdrawing from the university. "We are confident that Ms. Love's death was not intended, but an accident with a tragic outcome."
I really, really, really loathe the victim-blaming shit that is especially prevalent at trials in which marginalized people have been assaulted and/or killed.
Lost Open Thread
BLUB.
(Take a look at what I chose for last week's image. You're good, Lost. You're really good.)
Last night's episode will be discussed in infinitesimal detail, so if you haven't seen it, and don't want any spoilers, move along...
This is a real thing in the world.
The 41-Year-Old Virgin Who Knocked Up Sarah Marshall and Felt Superbad About It, a direct-to-DVD spoof of Judd Apatow films.
Spoofing has never been so hysterical! Get down and dirty with a horror-filled trip to get a chest wax, baby mamma drama and one middle-aged man who really needs to get laid when the comedy mash-up The 41-Year-Old Virgin Who Knocked Up Sarah Marshall And Felt Superbad About It debuts on DVD June 8 from Twentieth Century Fox Home Entertainment. The wildest parody ever, it's laugh-out-loud insanity when "MADtv" cast alumnus Bryan Callen (Bad Santa) and Noureen DeWulf (Ghosts Of Girlfriends Past) "come together" in this hilariously raunchy farce featuring favorite characters from Judd Apatow's hit films.Wow.
[H/T to Shaker Ethyl.]
Full Disclosure
by Shaker Maud
People's private life is their own business, and I extend this principle to public figures, in general. Though I think the single most important driving factor in straight people's acceptance of gay people and support for their rights has been the courage of gay people in outing themselves to their friends and family, who thereby have discovered that gay people aren't some alien life form found exclusively in New York and San Francisco, but are their friends, neighbors and relatives, I also don't believe it's generally appropriate to out others. Being gay is a risk to people's livelihoods, family relationships in some cases, and safety and well-being, and for the most part I don't think it's appropriate for someone to impose those kinds of risks on another, especially when zie has not had the opportunity to prepare for it.
There is one exception to this. When someone wields public power, whether as a member of government or through leadership in organizations which actively work to shape government policy, or through influential writings in an academic and/or health care field, and when that person uses hir power to work to suppress the basic rights of others based on the view that they are in some way defective, that person has the responsibility to be honest about what hir personal stake is in the policy issue zie is trying to influence.
If you are an influential medical researcher and you are receiving fat fees from a drug company whose products you advocate the use of, the public is entitled to know that so they may consider it in evaluating your support for those products.
Likewise, if you are a founder of an aggressively anti-gay lobbying organization, if you are a widely-published professor of neuropsychiatry who also serves as a board member of an organization which purports to turn gay people straight, if you further are a member of another organization which peddles anti-gay and anti-trans bigotry to parents and schools in the guise of scientific guidance on raising healthy children, and you are discovered to have a history of taking "fun trip"s with a young male companion whom you met through Rentboy.com, I think the public, whom you are attempting to persuade of the evils of Teh Gays and their Agenda, is entitled to all the information which might aid in their evaluation of what sort of substance you are spreading in the name of Science and the Public Good.
Meet the Rev. Dr. George Alan Rekers.
Via.
[Related Reading: Rogers Outs Republican Senator.]
Open Thread
Hosted by Bruco. Apparently, zie has glow-in-the-dark boots! (Suggested by Shaker InfamousQBert.)
Question of the Day
Of the 1.5 he's released, what is your favorite Justin Bieber album?
If you're one of the three people in this galaxy (source: CNN) who doesn't have Bieber Febver, and would like to simply name your favorite album of all time, that will be acceptable.
I Have a "Good Idea" for a "Good Guy"
So, I was watching the trailer for "The Good Guys" and I noticed that Colin Hanks (Tom Hanks' son, or, according to Iain, Tom Hanks' "weird little cousin") looks exactly like his dad. And I also noticed that he hasn't really been doing anything worthwhile lately with his career; "The Good Guys" doesn't look like an exception to that trend.
Okay. So I decided to pitch an idea to Mr. C. Hanks' agent to help get him out of this rut that he's stuck in. My plan is for Mr. C. Hanks to star in remakes of all of Mr. T. Hanks' classic films from the 80s and 90s, and they should all be shot-for-shot remakes directed by Gus Vans Ant, Esq.
I would first like to see a remake of Splash, with teen sensation Miley Sinus in the title role as the beautiful mermaid named Splash. "Hey, ya'll, my name's Splash! Don't put water on me!" It's gonna be great.
I also recommend putting immediately into production the Holy Trinity of Meg Ryan/Tom Hanks romantic comedies—Joe Versus the Volcano, Sleepless in Cincinnati, and You've Got the E-Mail—starring Mr. C. Hanks and my generation's Meg Ryan, Justin Beeper.
America's Sweethearts!
Think of the possibilities! Castaway with Kevin James as Wilson, who will get a full CGI makeover in this version. The remake of Gorrest Fump could see Mr. T. Hanks reprise the role made famous by Haley Joel Osment, Gorrest Fump, Jr., in full Benjamin Buttons make-up. A return to A League of Those Ladies' Own, the seminal favorite of lady-baseball, which reminds us of the important message, "There's no cryogenic baseball!"
In sumnation, this is an excellent idea, and Colin Hanks should do it immediately. The End.
[Thanks to Liss for the help on this one!]
So...
...there's this article at CNN in which Elizabeth Gilbert gives women advice about going easy on themselves, and each other, and accepting failure as a natural part of taking risks and living a full life.
I could pick at the problems with the piece—like the disappearing of imposed cultural expectations created outside of the sisterhood, or the truly annoying tone, or the fact that the intended audience is quite evidently privileged women primarily—but I'm not really interested in recommending the piece as much as just relating its intent.
Which is about women not judging themselves and other women.
Because you really need to understand that's what it's about, irrespective of its flaws, to fully appreciate how CNN linked this piece on its front page:
"Women need to lighten up."
Sure. Thanks, CNN!
Today in Just Like Jesus Would Do
Vatican investigates nuns on complaints of "feminism, activism."
Of course they do.
[H/T to Shaker Azzy.]
CNNMoneyFortuneWevNewz: Well-Off Hard Hit by Inconvenience
by Shaker EastSideKate, a feminist teacher/scholar/mother/partner/derbygirl from Upstate New York.
According to some editor guy at CNN/Money/Fortune/wev, the not-quite-rich ($250k-$500k/yr) are hurting, and not at all entitled or anything.
The hard hit folks in question are "HENRYs":
"...generally folks in their 30s and 40s who got the best grades in high school, worked their way through college, and logged long hours as law firm associates or consultants on the rise"Oh noez! What about the middle-aged lawyers who worked oh so hard?!?! They're soooo smart and deserving unlike the rest of youz!
I sense danger ahead.
"Obama was targeting the HENRYs for big tax increases, declaring that families making over $250,000 a year were 'the rich' and needed to 'pay their fair share.' Even then, I [Shawn Tully, senior editor-at-large of Fortune] argued, the HENRYs were so squeezed between their big expenses for the things they considered staples -- private schools and day care for the kids, for example -- and an immense tax burden that typically took at $100,000 from a $350,000 income, that they not only weren't rich, but stood little chance of ever saving the big nest egg to qualify as truly wealthy."Wha?? Pay 28% of their paycheck in taxes?!? The absurdity!!! These people deserve riches! Yet you propose to tax them at a time when opting out of society is oh-so-costly!
The whole article seems to be arguing for a society that the editors of CNN/Money aren't considering. Folks with 6 figures are hurting because their incomes have been cut by 25%? They can't afford to send their kids to separate, well-funded schools? High quality child care is expensive for them? That's just zany! My child will be going to well-funded public schools, and before class, I'll just drop her off at the free daycare center where... wait, what were we talking about?
I'm not smart, or middle-aged, or hard-working, but I recognize some parallels between my situation and that of the HENRYs. Rather than pitting Obama and Engels against the HENRYs and big corporations, maybe the HENRYs and the rest of the working class are actually in the same boat. Sure, the HENRYs aren't riding in steerage, and the bubble in the early 2000's helped them afford top-shelf liquors in the boat's bar, but seriously.
Alas, having us all in the same boat doesn't allow us to dismiss less fortunate folks as less deserving. Once you do that, you might actually start having to think about, say, what was responsible for the financial meltdown, and who benefited from the run up to it. Gasp!
On second thought, the HENRYs should probably keep complaining about how unfair it is that they have to share the pain of a broken system that they toooooootally deserved to benefit from. Yes, that's it. We can totally sell them expensive stuff to carry around at their protests against the less deserving.
Quote of the Day
"Obviously [Mirandizing attempted Times Square car bomber Faisal Shahzad] would be a serious mistake...at least until we find out as much information we have. … Don't give this guy his Miranda rights until we find out what it's all about."—Senator John McCain, arguing that an American citizen should not be read his Miranda rights, lest, I guess, he be accidentally afforded those rights. Or something.
Today's Edition of "Conniving and Sinister"
See Deeky's archive of all previous Conniving & Sinister strips here.
[In which Liss reimagines the long-running comic "Frank & Ernest," about two old straight white guys "telling it like it is," as a fat feminist white woman and a biracial queerbait telling it like it actually is from their perspectives. Hilarity ensues.]
She Should Be Grateful...
In which this e-mail exchange will serve in lieu of an actual post.
elle: Lots about this article seems wrong, including the, "see? this fat black actress knows how to treat people"* at the end:
It's always a let-down when folks you've admired or respected from afar turn out to be jerks in person. Case in point: Gabourey Sidibe, the Oscar-nominated actress in the title role of "Precious."[Gabourey] Sidibe might be a “jerk” or she might be protective of her time and privacy or she might have been burned by the media, etc., but I wonder if part of his shock is that a fat woman has the nerve: 1) not to be flattered every time someone deigns to pay attention to her (you, know the, “you should be grateful that…”) and/or 2) to be assertive.
(snip)
[A]fter meeting Sidibe at the White House Correspondents dinner and hearing about others' negative encounters with her, I'm putting down my pompoms.
I was thrilled to spot her at a table laughing uproariously with the man sitting to her right. "I know you're having a good time and I'm sorry to interrupt," I began. My next sentence didn't come out because Sidibe shouted over the din, "Yeah, come back in five minutes!" Thinking she was joking, I laughed and pretended to walk away. When I noticed that the look in her eyes meant she was serious, I walked back to her and said, "I just wanted to congratulate you on your nomination. I thought your performance was spectacular. I even wrote a column about it." After wishing her good luck, I rejoined my friends.
Back at the table, I sheepishly related the incident to my colleague Jo-Ann Armao. "Oh! She's horrible," Armao said in her wonderfully blunt way.
Liss: WTF?! Apart from the fact that Sidibe doesn't owe anyone ANYTHING, I fail utterly to see what was "mean" or rude or wevs about how Sidibe behaved. Some random dude interrupts her rollicking conversation and she doesn't immediately stop to pay attention to him, but tells him to come back? NOT RUDE. Some woman says her performance was incandescent in a fit of pretentious pique, and Sidibe isn't sure what that means and responds like most anyone would when they don't know what the hell someone is talking about? NOT RUDE. Refusing a picture on demand? NOT RUDE.
You totally hit the nail on the head: Her crime was failing to be GRATEFUL that Important People showed interest in a fat black woman. "Doesn't she know we don't show interest in fat people, or black people, or women, NO LESS ALL THREE?!"
The nerve of her!
elle: I'm going to label it "today in fat hatred," and note that the way his outrage is gendered and raced is astounding, as well.
____________________
*I’m referring to the mention of Queen Latifah.
It's a Boy!
Dudley Q. McEwan, 70lbs. 5oz.
Dudley (aka Dudz, Dudders, Duddly Wuddly, Lord of Duddlington, The Dud Abides) arrived at our doorstep—after a very long process of breed research, rescue research, applications, references (thanks, RedSonja!), cat introductions, and house-readying—last Thursday night. He was the first and only potential rescue we met, as it was love, and more importantly compatibility, at first sight.
As greyhounds are sight hounds, and Dudz is a retired racer who was trained to chase a "rabbit," we basically needed to adopt a failure—a dog who was never a great racer because zie had low prey drive. Hir reaction to Olivia was going to be of particular concern, since she's white (like the "rabbit"). When Dudley visited our house for a meet-and-greet, Livs puffed herself up like a great fuzzy zeppelin and hissed at him. He slowly backed away, with a look on his adorable wee face that seemed to say, "What the fuck was THAT?!"
Still, we had an introduction plan in place once he arrived, which involved a leash and Dudley's racing muzzle, which he's swell about wearing. But on Friday morning, I had him in the office with me sans leash or muzzle, because I didn't expect the cats to want to venture near him for days. Shows you what I know! Livs and Sophs were straight into the office in the morning as always, and I just decided to play it cool and see what happened, since Dudz had been scared of them at the meet-and-greet. He paid them no attention at all, even when Olivia stuck her nose into his food and water bowls.
I called Iain. "Well. That was easy!"
By Friday morning, Dudz and Livs had made…well…if not friends, exactly, they'd at least made acquaintances:
Sophie soon followed suit, and, though they are still leery of one another, yesterday morning, Sophs and Dudz touched noses in a heartbreakingly sweet and friendly little exchange.
Matilda is having none of it. She will be in the same room with Dudz, but she's firmly resisting a formal introduction, no doubt hoping the stinky lump will disappear.
Dudz is still a puppy—he's already retired from racing at a year and half old, and it's no wonder, since he evidently has the prey drive of a garden slug. He pays no attention to squirrels and rabbits on our walks, and he instantly made fast friends with a little white pooch at the dog park over the weekend. An utter failure as a racer, he is a total winner for us.
Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.
Dudz is already madly in love with Iain, and seems to trust him implicitly. He's more wary of me, and when I approach him (especially holding the leash), he frequently rolls over onto his back and does a little submissive urination, even in his crate. (Where he'd happily spend the whole day, left to his own shy devices.) So I'm spending a lot of time with the washing machine and the spot cleaner, lol, and also with the treat bag, using sideways approaches and crouches and averted eye contact to try to communicate in "dog" slowly but surely that I am a bearer of only good things.
When Iain is around, Dudz trusts me more, so we are taking advantage of that, too. Last night, I got on the floor and Iain curled himself around me from behind, and Dudz then flopped over along my front. It's just going to take some time for him to trust me on my own.
"Who's a good boy?"
Other than his timidity, he has so far been an absolute dream. He has the sweetest temperament—he loves people and other dogs; he takes food from your hand gently, without any snapping; he is curious about his environment but doesn't get overexcited; he walks on the leash at your side so beautifully that you barely know he's there. He's a good boy in the car, too!
He's still baffled by the concept of "toys," and one of our challenges is to bring out the happy-go-lucky inner dog in him. Too much enthusiasm scares him, so it's confidence-building first, and then we'll learn how to have fun! And he needs to put on a good 10lbs; he's only been off the track a little more than a month, so he's still got the skin-and-bones physique of a racer.
And, naturally, he can run like the wind. He was able to let loose at the dog park over the weekend, and I got some video of him running with Iain and then taking off for a bit of a gallop (please forgive my raspy breathing from the stubborn chest infection that's still hanging around):
He is, however, as are most greyhounds—the "45-mile-an-hour couch potatoes"—a lazy git who just wants to lie around and look adorable about 18 hours a day, which he does very professionally.
In fact, I'm pretty sure he's overdue for a TREAT!!!eleventy!, so if you'll pardon me for a moment, I must go give the GOOD BOY his paycheck for proficient cuteness.
[Previously: It's a Girl!]
Tory Senator to Women's Groups: "Shut The Fuck Up!"
I do wish I were exaggerating. Tory (Conservative) Senator* Nancy Ruth (a white cis woman) said on Monday morning to a meeting of international women's rights groups that she'd convened:
With the recent controversy about the government's plans to omit funding for abortion from its maternal health policy for developing countries, the panelists said it was an issue they couldn't ignore.Let me say clearly here, for the Senator's benefit, as she seems to be a bit confused on the way this works: we don't work for you. You work for us. You're appointed to be our fucking representatives in the Senate, not to be political shills for Robin Harper and his Band of Married Men, blazing their lonely and courageous trail down a well-marked and well-travelled road, stealing from the poor, and giving to the rich.
However, during the question and answer period, Ruth advised the room that pushing the abortion issue was not the right strategy if they really wanted progress on the maternal health issue. Her comments were caught on tape by the Toronto Star.
"We've got five weeks or whatever left until the G8 starts. Shut the f--k up on this issue," she said. "If you push it, there'll be more backlash. This is now a political football. This is not about women's health in this country."
She went on to say, "Canada is still a country with free and accessible abortion. Leave it there. Don't make this an election issue."
When we come to you, at your invitation, and present current women's issues to you, you don't get to turn around and fucking tell us "No, that's not an issue, shut the fuck up." You get to shut the hell up yourself, and listen to the people you swore a fucking oath to represent.
So don't hold your breath, Senator Ruth. There won't be any shutting-the-fuck-up out here. We'll continue to raise hell, our voices, and our hopes, because we expect more. We will not rest, ever, until the fight is won. And if we go to our long rest before that day, know that our children will fight on as well. And theirs. And theirs.
You will never turn the clock back on us, Ms. Ruth. Get used to it.
EDIT: I wanted to add, yes, I'm aware that Ms. Ruth has served women's rights well in the past, with her involvement in the founding of LEAF, and various other acts. Absolutely. That doesn't mean that when she turns to the Dark Side, we can't call her out on it; and silencing women about our rights, as far as I'm concerned, makes her basically Darth Harper's Padawan.
* In Canada, the Senate is an appointed body, serving as the upper house of parliament, similar to the UK's House of Lords or the US Senate (save, in the latter case, for the "appointed" bit). It is generally toothless; whenever the Upper House threatens to block some piece of legislation, the government-of-the-time threatens to abolish it, which makes all the comfy-womfy Senators in their comfy-womfy lifelong seats go all wibbly (what the hell would they do if they had to work for a living! - that shit's for the peons!), and they back down. Effectively, we have a one-house Parliament in this country.
Tip of the CaitieCap to the inimitable James Nicoll.
Today in Rape Culture
[Trigger warning.]
A jury in Australia has acquitted an accused rapist on the basis that his female victim had to have been an "assisting, collaborating, consenting" partner, because there's no way the rapist could have removed her "tight size 6 skinny jeans" on his own.
Nicholas Gonzales, 23, admitted to [sexual contact] with the 24-year-old accuser, but insisted it was consensual.So, unless I'm mistaken, the idea here is that the woman wearing the jeans is capable of getting them off on her own, without assistance, every time she needs to pee and at the end of every day she wears them, but a man intent on raping her couldn't possibly do the same. Okay.
The woman said Gonzales pushed her on his bed and held her down against her will, the Daily Mail reported. "I struggled to try to get up for a while and then he undid my jeans and he pulled them off," she testified.
Gonzales' lawyer pressed her, saying it would be "difficult for skinny jeans to be taken off by someone else unless the wearer's assisting, collaborating, consenting."
"I would disagree," the woman replied.
(And, just to be sure I understand The Rules, a short skirt means I'm "asking for it," and skinny jeans are axiomatic evidence of consent. Got it.)
What I find particularly galling about this acquittal is the idea that even if a woman did help take off her jeans, that's the same as consent. It's not remotely difficult to imagine being in a situation where an evidently dangerous man with no compunction about hurting his victim is holding her down and demands she remove (or help remove) her clothing, threatening her with ever more brutal violence if she doesn't comply. That's not consent. That's a survival strategy.
I am constantly amazed how many people—how many juries—apparently believe that victims are supposed to discern during the commission of a rape whether the rapist will really carry through on his threats, or whether merely refusing to take off one's "skinny jeans," for instance, will thwart him. Sometimes potential rapists are thwarted by something that simple, but of the two possible outcomes, it seems both the unlikeliest and riskiest, especially under duress.
And it's eminently reasonable to conclude that someone who is willing to rape you is also willing to kill you, if that is what he is threatening to do. Compliance under those circumstances is categorically not consent.
Which is why rape cases shouldn't be decided on bullshit like "those jeans didn't come off by themselves." Whether they did or didn't doesn't matter. The only thing that matters is the presence or absence of consent.
Of which skinny jeans are not evidence.
The "skinny jeans defense" has been successfully used in South Korea and Italy, as well.
[H/T to Shaker Kate217.]
